The report came out recently indicating that there would be no fewer than 35 bowl games played over the next few weeks as the culmination of the 2010 football season. Wow, that seems like an awful lot of games to decide which overall champions will emerge and causes one to wonder if it is really necessary to have that many play-off games at seasons end? Naturally, you would expect the best teams to go into a bowl game; those teams who have had winning records for the season and who have earned the honor of appearing in such games. That, however, is not the case with many of the bowl game invitees for this year. For instance, the New Mexico Bowl game will showcase UTEP against BYU, a pairing of two teams who both ended their seasons with a 6-6 record. Not exactly winning seasons. Another such bowl will be the New Orleans Bowl which will feature injury plaged Ohio against 7-5 Troy. There seems to be little interest generated by such match-ups except, obviously, for the schools who are playing in them. When the bowl play-offs become so diluted they lose some of their appeal. For that reason it would seem to be a better idea to have fewer bowl games and invite those teams who are truly deserving to appear in them.